Filed Under (Uncategorized) by dee dee on 08-07-2010
Dr. Kenneth Gentry has provided a response to an objection from Brian Simmons that was stated as follows:
If you admit location in Zech. 14, you should take the passage literally. For instance, if the city of Jerusalem is the literal city, then the mount of Olives EASTWARD of the city must be literal as well. Direction demands location. Otherwise, you are using an inconsistent two-tiered hermeneutic. There is simply no objective exegetical basis for taking the city literally, and the mountain spiritually.
Also, just because God said He was the fountain of living waters does not necessarily allow one to import that concept into Zech. 14. Christ also said “I am the resurrection and the life” (John 11: 25), yet orthodox Christians do not spiritualize passages that speak of the physical resurrection of the body. This very kind of reasoning is what leads to Hyper-Preterism and Hymeneanism.
Dr. Gentry provided a very good response that I recommend that you read here at this link. The first commenter also made a very astute observation, in part:
Isaiah 2:1-2 suggests that Jerusalem and Zion will be raised up to become a high mountain; however, that idea seems to be contradicted by the description that Ezekiel gave of a river flowing from the temple, which has such a gentle gradient, east of the temple, that its depth after 1,000 cubits was only up to his ankles, and after another 1,000 cubits, it was up to his knees, and after another 1,000 cubits, it was up to his loins, showing that in about half a mile, there was a change in elevation of less than three feet. [Ezekiel 47:3-4] The detailed measurements that Ezekiel provides, besides showing a remarkably rapid increase in the size of the river, contradict the idea that the city of Jerusalem will be literally “raised up” to become a high mountain, as any such elevation would tend to increase the gradient of the river, if that river is also taken to be a literal one.